Saturday, 14 August 2010

I Will Find Where Truth Is Hid, Though it Were Hid Indeed Within the Centre.

Anger arises...or hatred...or loving feelings. These emotions may seem connected to a story, to owning the story...but it's possible to feel something and just not poke it with a "why" stick. No one feels it; it's not so far removed; the anger simply is. This goes for every apparent emotion, feeling, intuition, thought, sensation. There it is. It is.

Sometimes the story unfolds, and the identity seems the most important thing. Who we are, our point of view, our role, our very being and existence as manifested by a body and a mind and thoughts and feelings and actions, seems the most important thing - perhaps the only thing. It can seem important to get to know one's own persona, the truth of it, the bare essential bones of it, uninterfered with by the comforting stories we tell ourselves about ourselves. It gets confusing. Surely those stories we tell ourselves about ourselves are an important part of our conditioning, part of the self-hypnosis that effects our essential reality? Surely it's impossible to disentangle all the stories, impressions, transference and projecting? Know yourself, some preach. Your persona is not important, preach others. Disenchanted with this conflicting advice, we try to develop our intuition, so as to know the right action to take, the right thing to do, the right way to feel, the right things to think, the right way to perceive reality - the TRUTH. We seek the unadorned truth of existence. We seek to strip away all filters of perception. We seek the fundamental answer to the fundamental question. The question: Why? Why me, why this, why anything? The answer: because it is.

The mind is a tricky, wondrous thing; perhaps it isn't the only thing, perhaps it isn't the be-all and end-all. Perhaps figuring things out isn't possible; in duality, the essential quality of manifested reality, co-existing mutually exclusive concepts are the norm. The mind can't fathom such chaos. But perhaps, if we stop trying, the truth is revealed. Maybe the truth is simply that it all exists, in an apparent motley jumble, full of hope and tragedy, comedy and despair, having and wanting, just as it does, in exactly the way it must. This could be labeled acceptance; but there doesn't even need to be something so far removed. What if there is no one that needs to accept? What if the identity, with its judgments and labeling, is simply an illusory, albeit it interesting, extra added bonus? Here we are, struggling or not, living life, coping, dying, praying, succeeding, trying to ease the burden of others, or retracted into a temporary perceived enclave of relative safety. We have been doing it right all along.

This clip is one from Lumet'sThe Verdict, my favourite performance by Paul Newman. As I stated above, here we are, living life, coping, dying...yet I find it hard to believe that Mr. Newman has died. He is my absolute favourite - and here's the conditioning behind it: he reminds me of my grandpa, who is 90 and looks after himself, bowls, fishes, keeps house, has all his marbles...despite having already died, at least conceptually, I find the hope arising that I've inherited his genes! The scene is the character Frank Gavin's summation, after a sticky trial taking a hospital to task for covering up a bad anaesthesia decision. Gavin was a washed-up alcoholic ambulance chaser before this case, and finds himself reborn in fighting for the comatose patient's family. A tour-de-force, and it almost makes me want to have such a concrete philosophy of life. We all seek truth. Enjoy.

118 comments:

Guilherme
said...

What if it is actually possible to live a life where anger never arises, hatred never arises, loving feelings never arise, a life completely unadulterated by any feelings whatsoever? If you are at all curious, have a look at The Actual Freedom Trust homepage (http://www.actualfreedom.com.au/), where people report living such a life, and the Dharma Overground discussion forum (http://www.dharmaoverground.org/), where several enlightened people and a few people who report living such a life discuss these things.

Does it never bother you when a feeling arises and drives you to do something? If you are being driven by any feeling at all, be it love or hate, is that really freedom? Have you noticed the way people are driven to do horrible things like rape and murder and wars and suicide because of their feelings? Does that not bother you? And what is the use of being able to see things the way they really are if one does nothing about them?

Hey Guilherme, being bothered is a feeling. Perhaps there is no one bothered, and no one feeling - just botheredness (is that a word?) and the feeling itself. Feelings also drive wonderful, loving, nurturing, heroic acts, apparently. I am not bothered; no one is bothered. And there definitely is no use whatsoever of being able to see things the way they really are. Seeing is enough. However, usefulness can arise as well, from "time" to "time".

This time again a right humdinger of a Shakespeare quotation from you! I wonder if the people at Shakespeare's time had the same difficulties understanding this? I guess not. English has changed a lot since then and this is Elizabethan English.

I know "botheredness" is a feeling, I do not claim to be without feelings/emotions. I heard you mention grief in one of your interviews. Surely that means there is still something there in you that suffers even after enlightenment.

What I am saying is that there are people - not me - who have gone further and eliminated suffering altogether in any shape or form in themselves. That is, self-immolation in toto, the end of being itself. Lack of emotions is actually a side effect.

At the bottom of that page, you can listen to a conversation between two people, one who claims enlightenment and one who claims "actual freedom" which is the end of being itself and the end of all suffering and of all passions and emotions and feelings.

Hey Guilherme, great name by the way, grief (pain) is not necessarily suffering. There's nothing wrong with pain. The idea that there's something wrong with pain is what fuels suffering.

As you say, I suppose what you're talking about is a side effect. If there's still an ego floating about, who cares? If there is, it seems to be enjoying itself a LOT. There isn't anything here, as far as "I" can tell, that suffers. There isn't anything that resists what is. Maybe we're talking about the same thing. Maybe the elimination of all human emotion is a "worthy" goal, maybe not. Maybe there are no goals.

I'll look at the link if I get a chance. However, I've encountered most concepts that accumulate around enlightenment, awakening, liberation, seeing truth, whatever we're calling it today. They all exist, those concepts. They often conflict. They are. That's what's "important" about them.

Guilherme, thanks so much for your comments. And don't worry, I don't think you're making any claims to "proper" enlightenment, etc. It is so stimulating, having concepts to bounce off of - so enjoyable. But oh dear, maybe enjoyment arising is "bad"! Well, if so, so what? It is what it is, or at least how it's perceived.

Hey Burghard, Shakespeare had the description of Maya down to an art. My daughter said the picture looked like the film poster of Lolita, which had me worried, so I'm glad to hear there's a different perception "out there"!

Hi Suzanne, or should I say, "Hi No One In Particular", or maybe I should just say, "Hi No", and leave out the surnames One and In and Particular, because No One In Particular is a long name! I was born in Brazil, and Guilherme's the name I got, apparently it's the equivalent to William.

Thank you so much, really, for welcoming my comments, especially since they are making a criticism of enlightenment, though I am not criticising "Suzanne" in particular.

I do not claim any kind of enlightenment at all, "proper" or otherwise. I am actually quite miserable most of the time. But I do not give up due to a few precious memories of perfect moments which remind me that life can be better. What I am pointing to, is a condition that is actually different to and beyond enlightenment. And my comments are not all based on hearsay, or reading, but also coming from a place of personal experience.

To clarify, there are a few people who claim to have arrived at a condition that is superior to enlightenment, and they call it "actual freedom", that is, an actual freedom from the human condition of malice and sorrow. I know what that condition is like because it is possible to experience it temporarily, and I have, in what is called a "pure consciousness experience" or PCE.

During the PCE, everything is perfect, brilliant, and untainted by any sense of self whatsoever, and no feelings whatsoever, in a PCE, there is not even a sense of being, which is unlike what loads of enlightened people describe when they say "There is only being". Enlightened people typically take "being" or "Being", sometimes disguised as "Awareness", to be the ultimate reality, when actually, being can be done away with too, just like the ego was apparently done away with in enlightenment.

Some of the people who claim an actual freedom were enlightened too before they achieved it, so they have intimate knowledge of both conditions. Most enlightened people seem to believe there is nothing left that could possibly be done, and therefore they perpetuate malice and sorrow. Similarly, a lot of people who are not enlightened, take their own ego reality to be all there is.

To emphasise, actual freedom is a new type of freedom. The man who first wrote about it is called Richard and he is from Australia. There is a huge lot of free information on his website (The Actual Freedom Trust website), by him and some other people.

Richard created a method, which he called "the actualism method" or just "actualism", which is really quite simple. It consists of asking oneself the question "How am I experiencing this moment of being alive?". The idea is to be as happy and harmless as it is humanly possible. The idea is to find out how one is feeling at any given moment and if not happy to find out why. So actually, the method he developed is not about getting rid of emotion, but it is about cultivating the felicitous feelings, those that feel happy and harmless, because those feelings are the closest imitation of actuality. One day one then has a PCE, and one day actual freedom.

And now that Daniel Ingram got interested in this, there is a lot of discussion going on on the Dharma Overground too. I sincerely wish more enlightened people would consider the possibility that malice and sorrow can actually be eliminated, that way they wouldn't perpetuate it.

Hey Guilherme...no time...no perpetuation. Nothing wrong with tweaking experience, relabeling concepts, discussing "new" freedoms, trying to get the story "right". It is all the same thing. Call it Actual Freedom if you will. Why not?

You mention grief and you call it pain. I agree that it is pain but for the sake of clarity I think it is important to make a distinction between *emotional* pain and *physical* pain. Physical pain is inevitable and even necessary, but emotional pain is not. Even if there is nothing wrong with emotional pain, if it can be eliminated, why not? Grief, for instance, is not pleasant, and not useful either. There are reports of people who have eliminated emotional pain, which also means they have eliminated emotional pleasure, and they say life is perfect and full of wonder and magical and a fairy-tale-like paradise. They report that physical pain (eg. being cut) and physical pleasure (eg. eating) still remain. By the way, there is some research on the amygdala in the brain, that shows how stimulating it in certain ways can produce emotions like fear or whatever which filter and colour perception. Evolution came up with those instinctual passions, as a way to avoid danger and perpetuate the species in a quick-and-dirty way. But humans are more intelligent than other animals and can afford to do away with those ancient passions. It is only software, apparently.

Hi Suzanne (and Guilherme),First, thanks to Suzanne for another direct but eloquent piece - you do have a way with words. But mainly I'm chiming in because of my experiences with the Actual Freedom folks, who have reappeared after several years' hiatus. I engaged in discourse with them for quite some time because I thought they were offering something free of the "spiritual" taggage/baggage. However I (and many others) eventually resolved that their offering was nothing more than a cult. And based on their most recent postings, they seem to have gone off even farther on that tangent. OK, enough opinion - the real fact of the matter is that what they offer is a very dualistic model, the body sensing its place in the universe. That is all well and good, and perhaps a delightful story to play out but behind that is the unmistakable fact that one cannot determine a separate individual. I sincerely recommend exploring other avenues before that of AF - you might check out Greg Goode for a very pragmatic exploration of the sense of a separate body. He has some good videos on youtube you might like.

"Have you noticed the way people are driven to do horrible things like rape and murder and wars and suicide because of their feelings? Does that not bother you?"

But is that so? It is more that these things happen due to a lack of feeling. When you are told by someone that they have overcome emotional ups and downs you may be listening to soeone who has found transcendence, or you may be listening to someone traumatised or psychopathic.

I had a look at the actual freedom site and there is nothing there that hasn't been said for thousands of years, yet they are claiming to be bringing something brand new to the world. It's either delusional or a scam, aside from any truth they may be describing.Anyway, nice to come here and see what you are doing Suzanne, with your philosophy and pertinent Shakespeare and all.

Here is a question...Some people have a condition in which they are blind, yet they can really see. They have no conscious experience of seeing, yet they react to visual events - there is a partial block in there awareness, they recieve visual information yet are unconsciousof it.Could it be that some people can lose awareness of their thoughts or emotions in a similar way, and be thinking and feeling, yet not aware of it? I can think of a couple of gurus that claimed to have transcended emotion and thinking, and really seemed to believe it, but their words and deeds said otherwise.I think that before accepting people's claims as to their freedom it is prudent to consider the possibilities known and yet to be discovered about brain function.

case in point...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMLzP1VCANo

yet subjectively, what you get is what you get, and that may be nowhere or noself. Seems to me.

Hey Guilherme, it's difficult, using words and concepts to descrbe immediate presence, although I have to say that Sailor Bob has the best example I've come across recently:

"In recognising presence awareness, there is no 'thing' to see, just natural non-conceptual seeing, actually as it is without subject or object. See this and the realisation is immediate that what is labled as awareness or consciousness or mind can never be formulated as either a subject or an object. Being empty of a subject or object, it is emptiness seeing (cognising emptiness). Emptiness can never be emptied of emptiness, nor can it be filled by emptiness. With that concept cancelled out, only the wordless thoughtless indescribable emptiness remains. Not a vacuum or a void, but a vivid self-shining, self-knowing, self-aware emptiness, like a clear sky full of light. See for yourself. No one or other can do it for you. Immediate simplicity. Continue to see that the seeing is continuous. Any doubt, question, or argument, and the conceptual seeker has appeared again. See that and non-conceptual emptiness remains undisturbed". -Bob Adamson

Well, something like that. All I can say is that everything seems much the same, but it is itself - unfiltered; the ego stuff, the feelings, the going about one's business are just things that seem to happen. There isn't an extra added persona that judges and sorts it out or possesses it. Everything just is. Studying the amygdala is fascinating, trying to figure it all out is just fine. But no matter what it seems that's going on, including the awareness and knowledge of what's perceiving it and the education about the mechanics of the brain, it's just what seems to be going on. I don't think what you're trying to describe is new - I think it's being described in a slightly new way, in words that resonate with you, probably because your persona, like so many, suffers from terminal uniqueness and wants a new, different, better way to be. There's nothing wrong with any of this. It is.

Hi Chris, I suppose a lot of stuff can be labeled a cult - I just think minds love to be interesting and unique, and in the unfolding human story, it's fun to try to get a different take on conceptualising. It's all good - nice labeling!

Hey Anonymous, trying to explain and understand why people do what they do is mesmerising, and in the apparently unfolding story, is something that has been attempted since Caveman Burp suddenly turned to Caveman Urg and bashed him one on the head with his hunting club!

Hey Anonymous No. 2, yes, all the filters of perception, borne of conditioning, can be seen as a hindrance or a blessing. They are both, and neither. What is, is, even if it's a lot of nonsense. It all arises in awareness - that ability to apprehend anything at all.

That's right, Burp and Urg, but it seems like animals may have a theory of mind too, so it goes back even further probably.And what about Cavewoman Burp. didn't she expect Caveman Burp to read her mind. Which came first, the club or the nag? An interesting anthropological conundrum.Interesting that you picked up on that thing about the effects of depression on the visual system, when considered in relation to the accounts of moments of enlightenment involving a freshness and clarity to the visual world, something that has been noted and theorised upon in a different way here (if the not you that is you is interested in this part of the story).

Actually, I like that term, "terminal uniqueness", I didn't know it, I have to say I think you got that one right. Thank you. However, I don't see the evidence that what I have been trying to describe to you is not new, so until you provide the evidence that actual freedom is not new, you got that one wrong. Where is anyone else proclaiming that they have completely eliminated feelings? You, in particular (pun not intended), are certainly not claiming that, you are simply claiming that feelings are not yours, as opposed to claiming that they have stopped arising. The only one I can think of that said something close is Bernadette Roberts. By the way, in that recording that I mentioned before, very qualified people discuss this issue of new or not new.

You are trying to genuinely and openly converse and exchange with Suzanne. It won't happen. Eventually you will realize that only the contrived conceit of (fake) trivialization occupies her mind and compels her words.

"Mindfulness is practiced in Buddhist forms of meditation such as vipassana, through techniques like observation of the breath and bodily sensations. Right concentration refers to the progressive stages of dhyana (this is closer to what is called meditation in most Hindu traditions). In this discipline, the mind is gradually cleared of passionate desires, then thoughts, then finally even feelings of joy, until only pure awareness remains, in a state of perfect calm and equanimity. "

I should clear up, I'm not claiming that feelings are not mine if they arise, or that I am 'free' of them, though I understand the issues around all that.All I am saying is that some of those that do claim that are very dodgy, but OK, it's none of my business what you believe or who you follow.

Actually, self-immolation is the ultimate goal, the complete cessation of being, oblivion. The on-going goal is to be happy and harmless by minimising malice and sorrow and their antidotes love and compassion. The elimination of feelings is actually a byproduct of the end of being, but it does serve as a good indicator of whether being has been eradicated or not. Even if you disagree that such a thing is desirable or even possible, I want to say thank you for having engaged with me this far.

Hey Anonymous...29th comment Anonymous...great to have you back, although you are impossible to please! Anytime I try to crack a joke, you seem to think that I'm trivialising. Well...that's understandable. The other thing is I'm only so clever, and run out of intelligent things to say very quickly!

To the other/same/who-knows Anonymous, who thinks they are a "smart arse" and tells me to use Google. I have to correct you, and teach you a basic Internet lesson, did you ever learn to use quotes in a search engine? Quotes make a lot of difference so try [code]buddha "eliminate feelings"[/code] including the quotes. Not only that returns only a few results (less than a thousand with Google), the first result goes "Neither Buddhist Yoga nor Hindu Yoga seeks, as often mistakenly thought, to eliminate feelings and turn practitioners into hollow robots".

And maybe you should read a little bit of the Buddhist scriptures of the Pali Canon, the Tipitaka, sort of like the Buddhist bible, as opposed to rely on comments from some random website like you have done. Because then you will find information about metta (loving-kindness), karuna (compassion), mudita (joy), upekkha (equanimity), translations of these terms is from Wikipedia.

I suppose not many people have bothered to check out that audio recording on Daniel Ingram's website, or do a web search on Daniel Ingram. Daniel is an arahat, an enlightened man on the Buddhist tradition with expert knowledge on Buddhism and meditation practices. He is the author of the popular book "Mastering the Core Teachings of the Buddha".

And Suzanne, can you explain what you mean by "What is left to apprehend whether immolation has been achieved?", I don't really understand the question.

Hey Guilherme, as usual trying to be obtusely humourous...put another way, if no one is there who registers the fact that no one is there? It is what I try to write about over and over. No one is here even if something thinks that someone is here. Whatever arises - ideas/feelings/experiences along the lines of no emotions, virulent opposition to that very idea because it seems to negate what is good about humanity/duality/Maya/call it what you will; calling that good stuff metta or karuna or unadulterated joy; taking pleasant feelings, analysing them, fragmenting them, and carefully labeling them; objecting to such cerebral handling of joyful living; commenters objecting to me trvialising things I don't particularly know much about; commenters objecting to criticising comments: ALL of it, no matter WHAT its apparent form...it's the same thing.

Yes Quiherme, I liked listening to these guys mellowing out at the ranch exploring their minds.

So Guilherme, are you saying that in all of history no one has claimed to have the experience of complete and permanent cessation of feeling and emotion, nowhere in the entire writings of all the sages of all the world, and this Actual Freedom is the first time ever, out of all the billions of people who have come and gone all over the planet, before history or after it?

Anonymous said: "So Guilherme, are you saying that in all of history no one has claimed to have the experience of complete and permanent cessation of feeling and emotion, nowhere in the entire writings of all the sages of all the world, and this Actual Freedom is the first time ever, out of all the billions of people who have come and gone all over the planet, before history or after it?"

I don't know. I do think it's possible, like there is a first for everything.

More importantly though, is the fact that, right now, apart from these guys who are claiming actual freedom, no one else is claiming to have done it and no one else is even saying that it is possible to eliminate malice and sorrow, on the contrary, they usually insist that malice and sorrow is inevitable, it's OK because it is "being human", and so go on the rapes and wars and murders and suicides and domestic abuse. In this way enlightened people perpetuate malice and sorrow and so indirectly they perpetuate the wars and murders etc. In the history of enlightened people there is even the case of someone called Krishna who said it is OK to kill someone because you are not really killing the person only the body.

The fact is that right now, at the present time, in present history, there are people who are saying that malice and sorrow can be eliminated, that they have done it, and they freely divulge how it is that they have done it. It is definitely something new if one is only comparing it to what is available now. I think that giving more importance than it is necessary to the issue of new or not is a case of "fiddling whilst Rome burns". And as I understand, to go with the same analogy, enlightenment is a case of being OK with Rome burning, "It's not Self".

It's a strange state of affairs, Guilherme, that despite all the evidence that this is a universe of both creation and destruction, that humans should seek something that is indestructable and permanently free from suffering, and seek a compassion that is endless.I have come to the conclusion that people are like trees, and just as you walk through a forest you will see trees in all kinds of condition due to the forces of nature, healthy or damaged, so will you see people.Maybe one day the human race will be like a plantation, all regular and cared for.

I still don't know why you insist that these people are the first or only saying what they say.

How do you know there aren't others that are secret under bad government regimes? Or in a remote village in the Amazon or Arctic?

I do want to say that I liked the guys chewing over their insights, pretty sweet people and dedicated to... something.

And may I add that I have always thought the Gita may have been altered by the ruling class in a similar way as the bible was, to keep the warriors keen, though I'm not a scholar so I don't know. A lot of spiritual people seem to forget that little passage in their wishing for a world of spiritual peace. If people are finding divine bliss on the battle field, it's not something that is being publicized very much. Do you think that Kindred Spirit magazine would carry an article by someone who experienced limitless joy while dropping white phosphorous on people? What about all those martial artists who are also into zen.Say you were a burglar, and broke into Steven Segal's house while he was meditating and attacked him. Do you think he would be in a state of meditative peace as he broke you arms?What about that?

Perhaps what people are saying is that it doesn't matter how the story seems to be going; it is illusory anyway. Perhaps what some people are saying is: if there isn't any ego, persona, identity, whatever, that is interested in making the story go a certain way, the story takes care of itself, and perhaps it may unfold in some more compassionate way, more reflective of unconditional love. Perhaps what some people say is that the story is of duality, and in duality, there are always opposites. Maybe what the Actual Freedom people are trying to describe is the timeless, endless moment that is, now, always; our "natural state"; what all arises in. Maybe they are simply trying to say that in that reality, there are no feelings, there is no one to feel. In fact, perhaps they are just using a slightly different set of concepts to describe Nirvana, Nibbāna, Moksa, mandukya, the stateless state. Or perhaps not. I know nothing.

Anonymous said: "I still don't know why you insist that these people are the first or only saying what they say."

It is not me who is insisting on the issue of new or not new. Did you not read my clear "I don't know"? And do you know what the expression "fiddling whilst Rome burns" means? Perhaps you could consider the fact that it is nearly impossible to know with absolute certainty if this is entirely new, and instead, find out whether this is the same or different to what people that you actually know are talking about. As I said on a previous post there is Bernadette Roberts, a former Catholic nun, who claims something similar, that her affective system has been extinguished, but she is not accessible for discussion, whereas there are actually free people who are currently active on the Dharma Overground discussion forum.

Suzanne said: "Maybe they are simply trying to say that in that reality, there are no feelings, there is no one to feel."

No, they are not. They clearly and unambiguously state that feelings used to arise and now they don't. Feelings are not physical and as such do not actually exist but they are felt nonetheless as long as being is extant. They go into much more detail than I will bother to go into here, if anyone is really interested, please go to the Actual Freedom Trust website, all of this has already been discussed there, go to "Actual Freedom Site Map" and check "FAQ’s – Frequently Asked Questions", "CRO’s – Commonly Raised Objections" and "FFM’s – Frequently Flogged Misconceptions".

Suzanne said: "Maybe they are simply trying to say that in that reality, there are no feelings, there is no one to feel."

And I said: "No, they are not."

My answer was not very good, despite that this is already explained in the Actual Freedom Trust website, but anyway.

What they say is that feelings are real and the identity is real but neither feelings nor the identity are actual.

In enlightenment, only half of the identity is gone, the thinker, who thinks they are a person, and what remains after enlightenment, is the feeler, who feels they are nobody.

In actual freedom, the feeler is gone too and only the body is left, so reality, which is really "my" feeling reality, vanishes and feelings vanish altogether, and what is left is actuality, the actual world of people and trees and tables and ashtrays and flowers and rivers and beetles and so on.

Reality never existed to begin with, but in enlightenment reality does not really vanish, it becomes like a dream, it's still there only now it is sugar coated with love.

And back to the feelings again, basically, if there is a feeling there is a feeler, who is yet another identity in disguise. To quote Richard "'I' am 'my' feelings and 'my' feelings are 'me'" and "'me' at the core of 'my' being is 'being' itself". Basically, "pure being" is the feeler.

Hey Guilherme, it seems like the ever lovin' ego will find all kinds of ways to be new and different; and that concepts are never adequate to describe what is, however you label it. But bless us all for trying.

The first comment I sent today appears to be missing so I'm posting it again here:

Anonymous said: "I still don't know why you insist that these people are the first or only saying what they say."

It is not me who is insisting on the issue of new or not new. Did you not read my clear "I don't know"? And do you know what the expression "fiddling whilst Rome burns" means? Perhaps you could consider the fact that it is nearly impossible to know with absolute certainty if this is entirely new, and instead, find out whether this is the same or different to what people that you actually know are talking about. As I said on a previous post there is Bernadette Roberts, a former Catholic nun, who claims something similar, that her affective system has been extinguished, but she is not accessible for discussion, whereas there are actually free people who are currently active on the Dharma Overground discussion forum.

Suzanne said: "Maybe they are simply trying to say that in that reality, there are no feelings, there is no one to feel."

No, they are not. They clearly and unambiguously state that feelings used to arise and now they don't. Feelings are not physical and as such do not actually exist but they are felt nonetheless as long as being is extant. They go into much more detail than I will bother to go into here, if anyone is really interested, please go to the Actual Freedom Trust website, all of this has already been discussed there, go to "Actual Freedom Site Map" and check "FAQ’s – Frequently Asked Questions", "CRO’s – Commonly Raised Objections" and "FFM’s – Frequently Flogged Misconceptions".

To Suzanne and Anonymous, I don't think I will be posting much longer here as I see that there is no interest whatsoever and there is no genuine discussion and possibly there is really only trivislisation like Anonymous said previously.

One of my comments has not appeared so I re-sent it, let's see if it shows up, not that important, but I'm assuming Suzanne did not delete it on purpose, maybe it was not sent properly, as she has not censored me previously.

Suzanne, what you are doing is called using the straw man argument, just because I am not enlightened and therefore have/am an ego doesn't mean I cannot say something valid like you seem to suggest by saying that it's "ego" it's "persona", you are not engaging in any sensible discussion.

Simply saying that it is or it is not new does not make so, I have provided evidence where neither Anonymous nor Suzanne have done so, and if I were to argue like Suzanne, I could even be as arrogant and patronising as Suzanne and say that she is simply wrong because she is enlightened the same way she implies I'm simply wrong because I'm not, but I don't do that, because that clearly is not sensible rational thinking discussion.

Guilherme,It really boils down to one of two positions: you are completely defined by the perimeter of your skin, including your brain which is where your mind lives; or you are not. I used to (really really) believe the former but after investigating this, I find that I cannot locate my self anywhere in particular, let alone somewhere in this meatbag. I recently spent time with my father who was dying of cancer. I could not determine when he was dad then not dad. Similarly, I can administer some chemicals or blunt force trauma to you and you will not be the same self you were prior to that.

So, applying Occam's razor, the great sages (list on request) present pointers to a fundamental truth that can and must be tested by you alone. My take with the AF folks was that nonduality and actual freedom were fundamentally harmonious but they would have none of that. Richard after all is the first, the first ever to stop being enlightened. Of course, his description of enlightenment reads more like a bliss-state rather than that described by someone like Jed McKenna. Or our charming hostess.

Interesting post. I agree that acceptance and surrender do bring peace. But they are transient thoughts just like any others. When you surrender or give up it's just another thought that says 'I'm going to give up'. The previous thought process which sought something is then negated by 'neti neti'-esque thoughts. But while that acceptance/surrender thought remains JUST A THOUGHT, it is transient like any other and may well disappear and the dreadful seeking may recommence. R. Maharshi said that the thought 'Who am I?' (Nan Yar) should be used all the time with every single thought. This brutal negation, he claimed, would destroy the ego. However, the strength of the inquiry and its persistent brutality depends on the conditioning of the practitioner, specifically their 'earnestness' in the words of Nisargadatta. He, and his guru R. Maharshi apparently must have been both obsessively earnest. But is this enlightenment? Is the total negation of thought necessarily a good thing? All human endeavour and experience is structured around thought? Was Maharshi totally thoughtless? The only evidence is his own word, a shaky basis...I take issue with the obsession with concepts. Concepts are transient. More comprehensive approaches must be welcome. Dogmatic people are narrow, v. limited types. Thanks for subscribing to my blog by the way! Appreciate the comments! x

Hi Guilherme, as far as I can tell I've published everything you've submitted. The only comments I've ever censored were along the lines of "you're so hot baby I want to shag you," which is just another passing thought/feeling and not especially to the point.

I'm sorry you don't feel the concepts submitted were engaged with properly. Sticking strictly to the story, it's always interesting what our reaction is when our expectations aren't met, and our causes not taken as seriously as we would like. You seem to want to withdraw. Which is fine, but the parcel of comments I've published this morning seem to give you some concepts to bounce off of.

The thoughts that arise when viewing the Actual Freedom stuff are along the lines of: this is the same thing, different words/concepts, informed by egos that want to be better/different. Actual Truth and Actual Freedom, or New Truth and New Freedom, or Even More Enlightened than Enlightenment, however one wants to label it...it is pure, unadulterated humanity, wanting to improve, to grow, to change, to be better. It is all the "best" attributes of humanity. Whatever is thought about reality and written about it, is not reality. Including the tens of thousands of words I've written in this blog. It's very probable I'm just incapable of understanding or experiencing anything so lofty as what these guys are trying to describe. However, there is no enlightenment, or New and Improved Enlightenment. There is this. It is enough, however one wishes to dissect and describe it.

Please feel free to visit and comment, Guilherme, even if the responses you get are not the ones you want! In the story of mental health, when our notions are challenged, we "grow".

Hi Chris, thanks for commenting, it does seem to be a state of non-corporeal bliss being described by the Actual Freedom people. I guess what writers like me bang on about is that what is, is comprised of all states, all desciptions, all feelings. And they all sit together well.

Hey Tom, no problem, like the blog. I guess Guilherme's not going to get much agreement and reinforcement here - but I think the ideas are being engaged with, if a bit dismissively. All stories are one, all stories are not - even those stories that seem most to the point. Including any I seem to tell.

Still going on about it being something new, but I've read about the same thing for years, the final disappearance of an 'I' - not even a diffuse 'I that is everywhere and everything'.

Really when anyone claims they are the first or greatest to achieve some spiritual state or other, and there are many, you have to ask, how do they know?

It's a big planet with a lot of people in a lot of places that nobody gets to hear about.Maybe the most enlightened person is an old lady who works as a humble cleaner in a North Korean hotel, maybe it is someone who is also insane and no one listens, maybe it is someone who is deaf and dumb, or illiterate, or in prison, or has a big brain tumor that stops them from communicating anything?

Are the only enlightened people white middle class people with broadband access?

Regarding the historical record, how do you know that tomorrow there won't be found a completely unknown book, like a Pali version of the Dead Sea Scrolls, that puts your myth to rest?How do you know the relevant texts were not lost or destroyed?

I did also miss something out, which is evidence of Actual Freedom that may be in a text in a private collection in a vault somewhere.What about people who may have died before being able to have communicated their AF?

Finally, to state categorically that somebody knows they are the first ever to be Actually Free would require knowledge of all those things I mentioned and more, and that would imply omniscience.So, is this Actually Free person that says they are the first somehow magically omniscient, or just able to somehow read the Akashic records or remote view backwards in time?

its becoming increasingly difficult to comment on blogs lately.If there is just awareness this open spaciousness then everything is welcomed or not it doesn't matter and what i've just written is just a conceptualization of "this" a point of view.From whom?was there ever "anyone" to want this different than it is...just the way it is?Love the post suzanne and all the comments!

Well, magic cat may seem to have all the answers, but what if it's just got a touch of rabies that makes it say things. People don't seem to consider these things in their desperation to find a reliable guru.

"It's possible to feel something and just not poke it with a "why" stick."

Feelings with no one possessing them...Just the occurrence of feelings without an endless manufacturing of thoughts to explain and bolster and excuse and justify and perpetuate and control the feelings. Without the poking of the mind's "why" stick, there is no victim of the feelings, there is no shame in the feelings or battle with the feelings. They are raw energy, no less beautiful than the wind.

Hey Gabriel - nuttiness arises! My kids have already ferreted out that clip, it's priceless. In my non-existent childhood, we had a cat named Rusty who worshipped our dog (Butch) and when Butch ran to the window to bark, Rusty tried to as well...it wasn't bad, actually.

Wow Colleen, I would have thought, keeping your profession in mind, that those particular unrecognised assumptions are deeply ingrained by conditioning and training! The illusion can be very powerful indeed. Apparently.

Last night I read a great story by Glenn Close called "No More Secrets" about her family members with mental illness. (The story can be read online by Googling Guideposts magazine and entering "Glenn Close" in the search panel.) Glenn's sister says, "I am not my disease." She is simply someone who is being treated for a disease. Sometimes I feel like saying, "I am not my profession." I am just someone who has a job. Glenn, along with Ron Howard and others has founded an amazing group and I highly recommend checking out the website to anyone- it is bringchange2mind.org. This all came to mind as sometimes I feel boxed in by all the views people sometimes to seem to have about shrinks. There is likely some basis for the various stereotypes, but sometimes I want to say to folks- see me not as a shrink but just as a fellow human being. I agree with you that the illusion can apparently be very powerful indeed, and what I love about your writing is the electric honesty that sheds layers of illusion.

Now, I have a question for you Suzanne, if you want to play, and that is this.After realizing that your knifey knife was vividly knifish, did you realize that you thoughts were also vivid in the same kind of way, that is very thoughty thoughts? And feelings. And sounds. Everything/anything else, really.?.

I find that talking (writing) about this makes thing vivid and present, simple and calm, like things have being. I don't know if that is something childish or buddhistic or nothing special at all, but I dig it.

Hey Anonymous, hmmm, yes, why not, thoughts are thought-y, feelings are feeling-y. Intense, no filters, but totally there. I'm still not describing it very well, but that's impossible anyway. And it seems to me that one man's writing is another man's meditation.

Nun?I didn't see no nun. Maybe something is getting lost in the Googleverse here.

I didn't read any clear 'I don't know' from Guilherme on the issue of whether the Actual Freedomers are really AF.Rather 'What I am saying is that there are people - not me - who have gone further and eliminated suffering altogether in any shape or form in themselves. 'is a clear statement of belief that he does know.

Also, I am well aware of 'the fiddling while Rome burns'. I am not fiddling while Rome burns, I am filtering out people that make mistaken claims. Guilherme may have experienced AF during his PCE, though from what I have read these are not quite the same, but what he is describing has been described for a long time, not something new. That doesn't encourage me to follow the same path as him at all, even though it sounds effective for something and even though the Interactive Buddha people sound perfectly honest and good willed about their experiences and practices.

I'm impressed with them and their dedication and insight, much better than I have seen in a lot of places, but this thing about AF being something new just doesn't make sense to me.

Guilherme is just following the trail of his meditational experience, I hope it goes well for him because he is serious about it and gets results.

Suzanne, I think it's fair to say that even if your experience is one of there is only this, that what the 'only this' does could be different if you went through stages of meditational practice, just like any other sort of practice. Would you agree?

And here is another question for folk in general, it requires to watch this -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCQbygjG0RU

Now, is someone subject to the rubber hand illusion experiencing a non-dual state in regard to that hand?Is a full blown non-dual state simply an illusion like that taken to an extreme, and rooted in neurology?

I don't really know what to say. Whatever I have to say feels hollow, shallow, meaningless. I've never read a blog like this before. And I call myself a wannabe writer. Emphasis on the wannabe. Blessings.

Very interesting exchanges about Actual Freedom. Browsing the AF site, my first comment would be that these guys must have something to sell : claiming to have something ! NEW ! is the same old marketing trick. As a matter of fact they do sell books and DVD. My second comment is more positive, I appreciate such statement as "It is vital that one[...] utterly comprehends that the only person one needs to change, and indeed can change, is oneself." In other word, this is "soft" proselytism. Third and last comment is a question to Guilherme : "what happens of the human species once it has gotten rid of desires and feelings, of any survival instinct, what about reproduction for instance ?"

Why stick? welcome back. Greece,sunshine, swimmingpools and sunglasses of wine.Have looked at a place called awakening women on internet. You might enjoy it.I read somewhere that if you do somthing 10,000 hours there is a strong chance you will become good at it. So nobody does anything for 10,000 hours.Is this your record for comments? logs of love.

Hi Bernard. Sometimes, it indeed seems the story of humanity is about procreation, first and foremost. It seems as though our mechanisms to feel and think are set up for us to believe we are separate, so that being together is a challenge. But it doesn't matter what the story seems to be.

I guess you mean they are both part of the same-old-story-that-doesn't-matter.Well, what really matters is that I just came back here in time to write the 100th comment to your post of 14 Aug; Yeah ! :-)

This body/mind is 63 yrs old and has lived alone for nearly 2 decades.It is a decade since there was a partner or sleeping with s/one; ie have been celebate.

There is no fantasising about sex, or desire when attractive people are seen.Have been at peace with no sexual feeling.

The other day I was in a store to buy some blank disks & a woman came up and asked me for advice on which disks she should buy to record a movie.

About late 30s she had the modern style of showing her (large) breasts.Being that close to her had the most powerful and frightening effect.

The desire to fondle this stranger was so powerful it deeply frightened me.Also became faint and body was shaking. Left the store as quickly as possible and got out of the shopping centre still shaken.

Given the choice of never having this experience again - well this body/mind would jump at never being so disturbed again.

That it was so frightening - because imagine the legal nastiness if fondling had happened.

No one would blame her for immodesty; this quiet, reflective body/mind would be treated as a pervert etc.

Horrible experience ... take it away .. Yes pleasecan do without that feeling!(ps sorry to be anonymous but came here from a lead and dont want toget caught up in registering wth google and allthat)

Hi Lenny, thanks for sticking with it...although I hope you have better uses for your nonexistant "time". I'll email you for details asap, it's a holiday today and the family is up London on the ferry from Kew to Westminster - 12 noon departure - got to get ready!

To the other/same/who-knows Anonymous, who thinks they are a "smart arse" and tells me to use Google. I have to correct you, and teach you a basic Internet lesson, did you ever learn to use quotes in a search engine? Quotes make a lot of difference so try [code]buddha "eliminate feelings"[/code] including the quotes. Not only that returns only a few results (less than a thousand with Google), the first result goes "Neither Buddhist Yoga nor Hindu Yoga seeks, as often mistakenly thought, to eliminate feelings and turn practitioners into hollow robots".

"That is, self-immolation in toto, the end of being itself. Lack of emotions is actually a side effect."It's not at all clear what is meant by being. I would assume that the end of being would include the end of everything including the ability to communicate.How could it not? What would do the communicating and why?

But when your in the cinema, and the lady in the seat in front has such a warm, soft, silky looking neck, and it's so dark and intimate, and the film is so boring, and what would those little hairs feel like under the fingertips?... ooh!

We need to make up storiesto be able to create realities.That's what separates sapienfrom beast.

Speak to the feastor famine.Sage, carnie, beggarCome to the play!

There was a Roman soldier bored with war,with whores, with bloody babies.Hoping to escape, he wrote a history,moved intohis Holy fantasy.It's but a Shangri-La, a piper's dream.Metal men, formed from clay,scream upon fields of battle,when nervescatch up with senses.Soothed with martial melodies,gratefully serve.

Listen, oh little one.The wind will catch you up as you sleep.You won't remember when you wake, weeping,how small, insignificant you are. Mommy assures,you're her own little star. Demons alone explainyour terror. You determineto do better. You soothe yourself with stories.You spin a tale of love within a dance.You spin yourself the center of romance,a home, a fortress, an emptiness fulfilled.

Like a child counting fireflies,alive in the darkened air,dare to immerse with sparkling wonder,to sharemore beautiful stories.

Followers

Visitors (since March 2009)

All words and pictures are copyright 2008-2011 Suzanne Foxton. Please do not use any material from this site, especially artwork, without permission from the author. Just ask, she'll probably say yes!

Disclaimer.

This website is for educational purposes only and is not intended in any way to be a replacement for, or a substitute to, qualified medical advice, diagnosis or treatment, or as a replacement for, or a substitute to, psychological advice, diaognosis or treatment, or therapy from a fully qualified person. If you think you are suffering from a medical or psychological condition, consult your doctor or other appropriately qualified professional person or service immediately. We are not responsible or liable for any action made by a user based on the content of this website. We are not liable for the contents of any external websites listed, or for any actions made by a user based on the contents of these extermal sites, nor do we necessarily endorse any product or service mentioned or advised on any of these external sites. Any data or information is provided for informational purposes only, and is not intended for any other commercial or non-commercial purposes. We will not be liable for any errors or delays in the content of this website, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon. By accessing our web site, you agree not to redistribute the material found therein, unless appropriate rights have been granted. We provide links to select sites for your convenience only. We do not necessarily endorse or recommend the services of any company. We shall not be liable for any damages or costs of any type arising out of or in any way connected with your use of our website. We are not lawyers, but we sure are guided by litigiousness!

By using the site, you fully agree to these terms, you naughty, naughty possible miscreants! Thank you.